|
|
Post by busaholic on Jul 26, 2018 21:32:21 GMT
But that would cut the long established night bus link with the west end and Edmonton, Ponders End and Waltham Cross. Plus would reduce capacity between Finsbury Park and central London on the nights when there is no night tube. We never did get that second night bus consultation that was supposed to come out months ago. I would imagine the ace would fall on 24h routes first with tfl now realising the efficiency of N routes covering many different day routes. It is a bit surprising that Waltham Cross has a night service - I think it is the only cross-border night bus. Other similar areas could probably benefit from a night service, such as Watford, Staines, Epsom or Dartford. It crosses the 'border' by how many yards or metres exactly?! |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 26, 2018 21:34:26 GMT
An alternative 27 scheme. Divert 27 from Notting Hill Gate to Acton Green Withdraw 31 Notting Hill Gate to White City. Withdraw 94 Oxford Circus to Piccadilly Circus and Shepherds Bush Green to Acton Green. Divert to Westfield and extend from Oxford Circus to Parliament Hill Fields via C2 . Converted to electric buses. Withdraw C2 440 changes as per consultation. I've suggested some similar changes before to simplify some of the routes in West London in response to various proposals/consultations: Extend the 9 to Chiswick Park, Turnham Green or Gunnersbury. The problem with that is TfL want to reduce the amount of buses on Chiswick High Road so that they can put a Cycle highway that's why they are doing a consultation to withdraw the 27 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Business Parl. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 26, 2018 21:37:21 GMT
I've suggested some similar changes before to simplify some of the routes in West London in response to various proposals/consultations: Extend the 9 to Chiswick Park, Turnham Green or Gunnersbury. The problem with that is TfL want to reduce the amount of buses on Chiswick High Road so that they can put a Cycle highway that's why they are doing a consultation to withdraw the 27 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Business Parl. But the 27 is an important link from the Chiswick area beyond Hammersmith to Kensington. Whereas some other routes on Chiswick High Road have similar destinations (e.g. 237/267/H91 or 190/391). Maybe divert the H91 via the A4? |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 26, 2018 22:11:12 GMT
The problem with that is TfL want to reduce the amount of buses on Chiswick High Road so that they can put a Cycle highway that's why they are doing a consultation to withdraw the 27 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Business Parl. But the 27 is an important link from the Chiswick area beyond Hammersmith to Kensington. Whereas some other routes on Chiswick High Road have similar destinations (e.g. 237/267/H91 or 190/391). Maybe divert the H91 via the A4? TfL think that people can use the Hopper to get to the 27. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 26, 2018 22:19:34 GMT
Double whammy is that Chiswick could also loose the 391 as far as Olympia aswell and no longer have a direct link to Fulham aswell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 6:01:45 GMT
Double whammy is that Chiswick could also loose the 391 as far as Olympia aswell and no longer have a direct link to Fulham aswell. I’m hoping the 391 remains , as you’ve said once the 27 goes that will be the only route that crosses Hammersmith* . It’s proposed replacement would join the 391 line of route at Ravenscourt Park. Hopper use is all well and good, but not if you are disabled or elderly. Amazed that pressure groups haven’t taken Khan to task on that front. *Didnt count the 190 as I’m thinking more of the Turnham Green area |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 27, 2018 7:40:53 GMT
Yes I forgot about the 190 aswell. I was thinking that the furthest into town from Chiswick is Shepherds Bush or Hammersmith thou i guess from Turnham Green that will be the furthest.
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 27, 2018 7:47:36 GMT
Double whammy is that Chiswick could also loose the 391 as far as Olympia aswell and no longer have a direct link to Fulham aswell. I’m hoping the 391 remains , as you’ve said once the 27 goes that will be the only route that crosses Hammersmith* . It’s proposed replacement would join the 391 line of route at Ravenscourt Park. Hopper use is all well and good, but not if you are disabled or elderly. Amazed that pressure groups haven’t taken Khan to task on that front. *Didnt count the 190 as I’m thinking more of the Turnham Green area I think the 391 could go if the 27 is retained. The 190 links Chiswick High Road towards Fulham, as well as to Richmond. A route currently terminating at Manor Circus (e.g. H22) could be extended to Turnham Green to replace that section. |
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Jul 27, 2018 16:25:57 GMT
It is a bit surprising that Waltham Cross has a night service - I think it is the only cross-border night bus. Other similar areas could probably benefit from a night service, such as Watford, Staines, Epsom or Dartford. It crosses the 'border' by how many yards or metres exactly?! By about 300m as the crow flies. The border is the M25 in that area. But as Waltham Cross and Freezy Water are contiguous along Hertford Road and that area is unusually built up for somewhere on the Greater London boundary, it makes sense for the N279 (and the 279) to continue just that little bit further to the centre of Waltham Cross and its bus station. You could probably make a case for similar areas like Loughton, but the N55 would have a greater distance to travel outside London. It is another demonstration of the poor quality of cross-boundary services, but I suppose the case for these is easier to make for daytime services when Londoners would be visiting towns across the boundary rather than night buses where it is usually the other way round. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 29, 2018 22:21:22 GMT
245 - withdrawn between Sudbury Town and Alperton, Sainsbury’s so that it can be extended to Finchley.
460 - Discontinued
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 30, 2018 7:47:16 GMT
245 - withdrawn between Sudbury Town and Alperton, Sainsbury’s so that it can be extended to Finchley. 460 - Discontinued If the current 460 is no longer needed south of Golders Green, how about a new and direct link from Golders Green to Barnet, via Finchley Central, North Finchley and Whetstone. This route could use the 460 number. I would then cut back the 263 to North Finchley to shorten the long route. The 234 would continue to link Barnet to East Finchley and Highgate. And along the same corridor, to shorten long routes for reliability: W7 - Extended to Friern Barnet via the 43 144 - Extended to North Finchley via the 134 (new link would also assist the 221) Plus some rationalisation of the 4/17/43/134/271 corridor (likely with the shorter 271 removed and other changes in replacement). Replacement(s) for 43/134 would terminate at Highgate Wood and/or Muswell Hill. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 30, 2018 8:39:46 GMT
245 - withdrawn between Sudbury Town and Alperton, Sainsbury’s so that it can be extended to Finchley. 460 - Discontinued If the current 460 is no longer needed south of Golders Green, how about a new and direct link from Golders Green to Barnet, via Finchley Central, North Finchley and Whetstone. This route could use the 460 number. I would then cut back the 263 to North Finchley to shorten the long route. The 234 would continue to link Barnet to East Finchley and Highgate. And along the same corridor, to shorten long routes for reliability: W7 - Extended to Friern Barnet via the 43 144 - Extended to North Finchley via the 134 (new link would also assist the 221) Plus some rationalisation of the 4/17/43/134/271 corridor (likely with the shorter 271 removed and other changes in replacement). Replacement(s) for 43/134 would terminate at Highgate Wood and/or Muswell Hill. The 263 may be a long route but it runs on a corridor that avoids many traffic filled areas which is probably why it has survived so it really should be left in its core form. The 234 is in an indirect route and is not a good replacement for the 263 in any event. The W7 is too frequent to be extended further even if replacing the 43 and does it current role superbly. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 30, 2018 8:46:21 GMT
I think the 460 south of Golders Green would be left to the 260 and North to the 13. Pre 2003 is was the length of the route that was the issue and a 15mins service become 2 12mins giving quite a frequent overlap. Since then the 13 has added a couple more journeys and hour do I can see Hopper fare to change from the 260 to North of Golders Green.
|
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Jul 30, 2018 8:52:45 GMT
If the current 460 is no longer needed south of Golders Green, how about a new and direct link from Golders Green to Barnet, via Finchley Central, North Finchley and Whetstone. This route could use the 460 number. I would then cut back the 263 to North Finchley to shorten the long route. The 234 would continue to link Barnet to East Finchley and Highgate. And along the same corridor, to shorten long routes for reliability: W7 - Extended to Friern Barnet via the 43 144 - Extended to North Finchley via the 134 (new link would also assist the 221) Plus some rationalisation of the 4/17/43/134/271 corridor (likely with the shorter 271 removed and other changes in replacement). Replacement(s) for 43/134 would terminate at Highgate Wood and/or Muswell Hill. The W7 is far too frequent for an extension to Friern Barnet, unless you're suggesting only extending part of the service.
I'm not sure why you think the 43/134 need shortening for reliability. In my experience they are already far more reliable than the 144, which you're proposing to extend! I do think that the Muswell Hill - Friern Barnet corridor could cope with a reduction, but there isn't enough stand space in Muswell Hill for any more terminating routes. Extending the 144 doesn't free up enough space for a frequent route like 43 or 134. Extending the W7 would free up space, but would hugely overbus Colney Hatch Lane so would defeat the purpose. And removing one of 43 and 134 between Highgate Station and Muswell Hill would be madness - have you seen how busy this section is?
The 234 is in no way an adequate replacement for the 263, given that it takes a very indirect route and doesn't serve Highgate proper. I suspect that if you were to cut back the 263 most people would change at North Finchley (Hopper Fare!) rather than go round the houses on a 234. Again I'm not convinced that the 263 is too long in its current form anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 30, 2018 9:10:53 GMT
If the current 460 is no longer needed south of Golders Green, how about a new and direct link from Golders Green to Barnet, via Finchley Central, North Finchley and Whetstone. This route could use the 460 number. I would then cut back the 263 to North Finchley to shorten the long route. The 234 would continue to link Barnet to East Finchley and Highgate. And along the same corridor, to shorten long routes for reliability: W7 - Extended to Friern Barnet via the 43 144 - Extended to North Finchley via the 134 (new link would also assist the 221) Plus some rationalisation of the 4/17/43/134/271 corridor (likely with the shorter 271 removed and other changes in replacement). Replacement(s) for 43/134 would terminate at Highgate Wood and/or Muswell Hill. The 263 may be a long route but it runs on a corridor that avoids many traffic filled areas which is probably why it has survived so it really should be left in its core form. The 234 is in an indirect route and is not a good replacement for the 263 in any event. The W7 is too frequent to be extended further even if replacing the 43 and does it current role superbly. Would it be possible to instead extend the W7 in replacement of both the 43 AND 134? |
|
